Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1887-01-08
NATIONAL DIVORCE LEGISLATION.

NATIONAL DIVORCE LEGISLATION.
Judge E. II. Bennett, in the Forum, de-
bates the much-considered subject of "na-
tional divorce legislation" When the
subject was first advanced to the rostrum
of public discussion, the verdict was quite
unanimous that the need existed for uni
forTiity of divorce laws throughout the
country. The only real issue then and
now relates to methods for attaining this
end. As the laws of the several States
now stand, it is possible for man or a
woman to occupy the relation of husband
or wife to two or more persons at the
same time. 1t is possible for citizen to
be the lawful husband of a woman in one.
State, but on removal to another to be, so
far as the law can make him, social out
law, because the statute of the latter State
refuses to recognize foreign decree d.
vorcing him from a first wife. The result
has been migration from one State to
another solely for the purpose of securing
DEGREES of enforcement. The consequent
scandal and conflict are matters of no
toriety.
1t has been objected that national di-
yorce law could not receive the eonstitu-
tional approval of the necessary number of
States, for two reasons-the extremely
wide divergence of opinion between the
people of many of the States as to what
should constitute cause for dissolution of
the marriage bond, absolute or partial
the jealousy of many of the States of any
further investment of the Federal Gov
eminent with powers and rights reserved
to the several States. We have believed,
and early in the debate maintained, and
still hold, that these objections could be
removed and the concurrence of suffi-
cient number of States secured to effect the
needful constitutional amendment.
1t will be remembered that some of our
most distinguished statesmen and philan-
thropists held consultations upon the sub
ject a few years ago, and that at one time
a Convention of State delegates to be
named by Legislatures was proposed and
generally advocated, to agree upon uni
form system of divorce laws to be adopted
by the States. But when il came to agree
ing upon the basis for such a council it
was found that not all the States could be
moved to action in short, public senti-
ment had not been sufficiently informed
upon the question, nor is it at this later
date
Uniformity must be secured and it will
be, for the needs of our social system de-
mand it. As we are now going on we are
offering premiums to all manner of gross
frauds in the matter of divorce, absolutely
degrading the marriage relation and con-
serving immortality. 1t is no exaggeration
whatever to say that the effects of DEGREES
of divorce in several States are so divergent
that the rights of property are not infre-
quently cruelty sacrificed, and the grossest
injustice done to children, to innocent
wives and to guiltless husbands The peo-
pie, therefore, viii not forever tolerate the
evils Of our present system. They will
not, in the blaze of nineteenth century en-
lightment, consent that mere difference of
latitude and longitude in our common
country shall typify radical antagonisms
between laws relating to the foundation of
the social fabric. 1t is simply unthinkabIe
that we shall continue in system that,
for instance, gives wife cause for divorce
on one side of a river, and denies her pro
lection on the other side, though her
grievance may be precisely the same on
either bank.
Judge Bennett proposes, as the remedy
for such evils, national divorce law. We
have not cared to more than scan his argu-
ment leading mp to his conclusion; i: can
proceed only in one direction, and the EVIL
dences With which he must fortify it are of
common repute, and familiar to every oae.
But the conclusion o. his monograph inter
ests us because he wisely decides that all
efforts for reform ought now to look to
Congressional legislation for specific.
The American Bar Association failed COM
pletely to secure uniformity in business
laws by State legislation. How can we ex-
peet better results in this.ot matter !?
The necessary amendment or the Constitu
ton Of the United States consists of but
two words the insertion of asd divorce
after the word bankruptcies in single
section, so that it viii read Congress
shall have power to establish uniierm laws
on the subject of bankruptcies and sliro,ce
throughout tile United States" Tkss will
require the assent of three-fourths al the
States, but, as Judge Bennett puts it, alsst
can be more easily obtained than unifog9
laws BY all the States, Or agreement by
convention of Representatives of the thirty
eight Legislatures, with no power to bind
the States to observe the Judgment of the
najoriiy.
We believe thas If Congress at the pres
ent session would propose the amendment,
within tho three years required to secure